DOCSLIB.ORG

Hampton Roads Congestion Management System

Total Page：16

File Type：pdf, Size：1020Kb

Download full-text PDF Read full-text
Hampton Roads Congestion Management System HAMPTON ROADS CONGESTION MANAGEMENT SYSTEM Part II–- Bridge and Tunnel Analysis Presented by: Dwight L. Farmer, PE Deputy Executive Director, Transportation January 19, 2005 CMSCMS OutlineOutline • Part I - State of Transportation (December 2004) • Part II – – Bridge & Tunnel analysis (Today) – Comprehensive congestion analysis (March 2005) • Part III – – Identification of most congested corridors – Congestion management strategies RegionalRegional BridgesBridges andand TunnelsTunnels Coleman Bridge Hampton Roads Bridge-Tunnel James River Bridge Chesapeake Bay Bridge-Tunnel Monitor-Merrimac Mem. Bridge-Tunnel Midtown Tunnel Downtown Tunnel High Rise Bridge AnnualAnnual AverageAverage DailyDaily TrafficTraffic Annual Average Daily Traffic at Regional Bridges and Tunnels, 1990 - 2003 100,000 Average Annual Growth Rates, 1990 – 2003 90,000 Monitor-Merrimac BT* 6.8% Downtown Tunnel High Rise Bridge 3.8% 80,000 Downtown Tunnel 2.8% Hampton Roads BT Chesapeake Bay BT 2.3% 70,000 Coleman Bridge 1.7% Hampton Roads BT 1.3% High Rise Bridge Midtown Tunnel 0.3% 60,000 James River Bridge 0.1% 50,000 * - Monitor-Merrimac BT growth rates Monitor-Merrimac BT are for 1992-2003. 40,000 Midtown Tunnel 30,000 Coleman Bridge Annual Average Daily Traffic (AADT) James River Bridge 20,000 10,000 Chesapeake Bay BT 0 1990 1991 1992 1993 1994 1995 1996 1997 1998 1999 2000 2001 2002 2003 Data Sources: HRPDC Economic Outlook, VDOT. Some data is VDOT estimates. Downtown and Midtown Tunnel data excludes Sept. and Oct. 2003 due to Midtown Tunnel closure. James River Bridge data excludes 9/15/03 – 10/3/03 due to equipment failure. AnnualAnnual AverageAverage DailyDaily TrafficTraffic • The amount of traffic crossing the HR harbor increased 64% between 1990 - 2003. Annual Average Daily Traffic Crossing the Hampton Roads Harbor, 1990 - 2003 180,000 160,000 140,000 120,000 100,000 80,000 60,000 40,000 Annual Average Daily Traffic (AADT) 20,000 0 1990 1991 1992 1993 1994 1995 1996 1997 1998 1999 2000 2001 2002 2003 Data Sources: HRPDC Economic Outlook, VDOT SeasonalSeasonal UsageUsage Seasonal Average Daily Traffic at Regional Bridges and Tunnels, 2003 Chesapeake Bay Bridge- 2003 Winter ADT Tunnel 93.8% 2003 Winter ADT 20032003 Sp Springring AADTDT 20032003 Su Summermmer A ADTDT James River Bridge 12.4% 20032003 Fal Falll ADADTT Growth in ADT Midtown Tunnel 8.3% 8.3% from winter to summer Coleman Bridge 19.2% Monitor Merrimac Memorial Bridge-Tunnel 22.6% Hampton Roads Bridge- Tunnel 19.1% Downtown Tunnel 8.3% 0 20,000 40,000 60,000 80,000 100,000 120,000 Data Source: VDOT Average Daily Traffic Winter includes January-February and December. Spring includes March-May. Summer includes June-August. Fall includes September-November. All facilities exclude data from 9/18/03 – 9/21/03 due to Hurricane Isabel. James River Bridge data excludes 9/16/03 – 10/3/03 due to equipment failure. Midtown Tunnel data does not include September or October counts due to the effects of Hurricane Isabel. UsageUsage byby DayDay ofof WeekWeek Annual Average Daily Traffic by Day of Week at Regional Bridges and Tunnels, 2003 Chesapeake Bay Bridge- Monday Tunnel Monday TueTusesdayday WWednednesesddayay James River Bridge ThuThrurssdayday Friday Friday Saturday Midtown Tunnel Saturday Sunday Sunday Coleman Bridge Monitor Merrimac Memorial Bridge-Tunnel Hampton Roads Bridge- Tunnel Downtown Tunnel 0 20,000 40,000 60,000 80,000 100,000 120,000 Data Source: VDOT Annual Average Daily Traffic All facilities exclude data from 9/18/03 – 9/21/03 due to Hurricane Isabel. James River Bridge data excludes 9/16/03 – 10/3/03 due to equipment failure. Midtown Tunnel and Downtown Tunnel data does not include September or October counts due to the effects of Hurricane Isabel. Usage by Time of Day • Monitor-Merrimac Memorial Bridge-Tunnel – Similar travel patterns in both directions. – More heavily used in both directions during the PM Peak Period. – During the PM peak hour, the MMMBT carries 80% of the traffic the HRBT does. 1 ,000 900 800 700 - c Volumes fi 600 500 N Findings e Traf Findings o r 400 thbo 15 Minut 300 und 200 100 Data Sourc 0 0:00 1:00 e : VDO 2:00 3:00 T 4:00 5:00 6:00 7:00 8:00 9:00 10:00 1 ,000 11:00 Time Per12:00 900 13:00 14:00 800 i 15:00 od 700 16:00 c Volumes 17:00 fi 600 18:00 Sou 19:00 e Traf 500 20:00 400 t 21:00 hbo 15 Minut 22:00 300 und 23:00 200 100 Data Sourc 0 0:00 1:00 e : VDO 2:00 3:00 T 4:00 5:00 6:00 7:00 8:00 9:00 10:00 11:00 Time Per12:00 13:00 14:00 iod 15:00 16:00 17:00 18:00 19:00 20:00 21:00 22:00 23:00 Usage by Time of Day • Hampton Roads Bridge-Tunnel – Long PM Peak Period duration. – AM and PM peak hour volumes are similar. – Midday volumes are about 75% of the peak period volumes. 1 ,000 900 800 700 - c Volumes fi 600 500 W Findings e Traf Findings e 400 s ttbound 15 Minut bound 300 200 100 Data Sourc 0 0:00 1:00 e : VDO 2:00 3:00 T 4:00 5:00 6:00 7:00 8:00 9:00 10:00 1,00 11:00 0 Time Per12:00 90 13:00 0 14:00 80 0 i 15:00 od 70 16:00 0 c Volumes 17:00 fi 60 18:00 0 19:00 e Traf 50 Eas 0 20:00 40 21:00 0 tbound 15 Minut 22:00 30 23:00 0 20 0 10 0 0 Data Sourc 0:00 1:00 e : VDO 2:00 3:00 T 4:00 5:00 6:00 7:00 8:00 9:00 10:00 11:00 Tim 12:00 e 13:00 P 14:00 e r iod 15:00 16:00 17:00 18:00 19:00 20:00 21:00 22:00 23:00 Usage by Time of Day • High Rise Bridge – Carries more traffic during the peak hour than other analyzed bridges/tunnels. – Peak travel periods are shorter than at other bridges and tunnels. 1 ,000 900 W 800 e s 700 tbound (T - c Volumes fi 600 500 Findings e Traf Findings o 400 w 15 Minut a 300 rds Va. 200 100 Beach Data Sourc 0 0:00 ) 1:00 e : VDO 2:00 3:00 T 4:00 5:00 6:00 7:00 8:00 9:00 10:00 1,00 11:00 0 Time Per12:00 90 13:00 0 14:00 80 0 Eas i 15:00 od 70 16:00 0 t c Volumes bound ( 17:00 fi 60 18:00 0 19:00 e Traf 50 0 20:00 40 T 21:00 0 o 15 Minut w 22:00 30 ards 23:00 0 20 0 Suffo 10 0 0 lk Data Sourc ) 0:00 1:00 e : VDO 2:00 3:00 T 4:00 5:00 6:00 7:00 8:00 9:00 10:00 11:00 Tim 12:00 e 13:00 P 14:00 e r iod 15:00 16:00 17:00 18:00 19:00 20:00 21:00 22:00 23:00 Usage by Time of Day • Downtown Tunnel – Long AM and PM peak period durations. – Peak hour volumes are comparable to the HRBT. – Noontime volumes are about 85% of the peak hour volumes. 1,000 900 800 700 - c Volumes fi 600 Traf 500 W Findings e Findings e 400 s tbound 15 Minut 300 200 100 Data Sourc 0 0:00 1:00 e : VDO 2:00 3:00 T 4:00 5:00 6:00 7:00 8:00 9:00 10:00 1 ,000 11:00 Time P12:00 900 13:00 800 e 14:00 riod 15:00 700 16:00 c Volumes 17:00 fi 600 18:00 19:00 e Traf 500 Eas 20:00 400 21:00 tbound 15 Minut 22:00 300 23:00 200 100 Data Sourc 0 0:00 1:00 e : VDO 2:00 3:00 T 4:00 5:00 6:00 7:00 8:00 9:00 10:00 11:00 Time Per12:00 13:00 14:00 iod 15:00 16:00 17:00 18:00 19:00 20:00 21:00 22:00 23:00 TravelTravel SpeedsSpeeds • Collected on congested facilities – HRBT, High Rise, Downtown, Midtown • Three travel runs in each direction for each peak period – October and November 2004 – Tuesday - Thursday • Mainline speeds only • Compared measured speeds versus speed limits to calculate delay • Does not reflect delays due to incidents TravelTravel SpeedsSpeeds • The Midtown Tunnel had the most recurring delay during both the morning and afternoon peak travel periods. Average Recurring Delays at Congested Bridges and Tunnels, 2004 AM PM NB High St to Brambleton Ave 18.4 min/veh 6.7 min/veh Midtown Tunnel SB 38th St to Wesley St 0.9 min/veh 11.3 min/veh WB Ballentine Blvd to Effingham St 2.0 min/veh 7.5 min/veh Downtown Tunnel EB Frederick Blvd to I-464 6.4 min/veh 2.0 min/veh WB I-564 to Mallory St 1.6 min/veh 5.1 min/veh Hamp t on Road s BT EB I-664 to 15th View St 6.7 min/veh 7.2 min/veh WB Military Hwy to I-464 6.8 min/veh 0.4 min/veh High Rise Brid ge EB Battlefield Blvd to George Washington Hwy 0.0 min/veh 1.2 min/veh SafetySafety • There were over 10,000 traffic stoppages, 200,000 vehicle inspections, and 14,000 overheight vehicles at regional tunnel facilities in 2003.
Load more

Recommended publications
  • Traffic Advisory for IMMEDIATE RELEASE CONTACT: Carley Brierre (757) 793-0337 [email protected] September 11, 2020
    Traffic Advisory FOR IMMEDIATE RELEASE CONTACT: Carley Brierre (757) 793-0337 [email protected] September 11, 2020 DriveERT LANE CLOSURE SCHEDULE From Friday, September 11 to Friday, September 18 Below is a list of significant tunnel/lane closures for the Elizabeth River Crossings (ERC) facilities. All work is dependent upon weather conditions and closure dates are subject to change. For updates, follow us on Twitter @DriveERT. US 58 East Midtown Tunnel: Alternating lane closures in the Midtown Tunnel eastbound on Sunday, September 13 from 6 a.m. to 10 a.m. US 58 West Midtown Tunnel: Alternating lane closures in the Midtown Tunnel westbound on Sunday, September 13 from 6 a.m. to 10 a.m. US 58 East Midtown Tunnel: Alternating lane closures in the Midtown Tunnel eastbound on Monday, September 14 from 10 a.m. to 2 p.m. US 58 West Midtown Tunnel: Alternating lane closures in the Midtown Tunnel westbound on Monday, September 14 from 10 a.m. to 2 p.m. I-264 East Downtown Tunnel: Alternating lane closures in the Downtown Tunnel eastbound on Sunday, September 13 from 6 a.m. to 10 a.m. I-264 West Downtown Tunnel: Alternating lane closures in the Downtown Tunnel westbound on Sunday, September 13 from 6 a.m. to 10 a.m. I-264 East Downtown Tunnel: Left lane closure in the Downtown Tunnel eastbound on Monday, September 14; Tuesday, September 15; Wednesday, September 16 and Thursday, September 17 from 8 p.m. to 5 a.m. the following morning. I-264 East Downtown Tunnel: Full tunnel closure in the Downtown Tunnel eastbound on Friday, September 18 from 9 p.m.
    [Show full text]
  • HAMPTON ROADS CLOSURES on WATER CROSSINGS, INTERSTATES and OTHER NOTABLE DETOURS for the Week of March 21-27
    RELEASE: IMMEDIATE March 19, 2021 CONTACT: Media Line: 757-956-3032 [email protected] HAMPTON ROADS CLOSURES ON WATER CROSSINGS, INTERSTATES AND OTHER NOTABLE DETOURS For the week of March 21-27 NOTE: This list covers full closures of interstates, ramps, bridges and primary roads, and lane closures at the bridge-tunnels and the Berkley, Coleman, High Rise and James River bridges. *Scheduled closures are subject to change based on weather conditions and other factors.* ​For information on the many other lane closures necessary for maintenance and construction throughout Hampton Roads, visit 511Virginia.org, download the 511VA smartphone app, or dial 511. Bridges & Tunnels: Hampton Roads Bridge-Tunnel, I-64: Single-lane closures westbound on: March 26 from 9 p.m. to 7 am. March 27 from 10 p.m. to 9 a.m. Monitor-Merrimac Memorial Bridge-Tunnel, I-664: Alternating, single-lane closures northbound on March 21-25 from as early as 8 p.m. to 5 a.m. Mobile, single-lane closures northbound on March 23 from 9 a.m. to 2 p.m. High Rise Bridge, I-64: Alternating, mobile, double-lane closures in both directions on March 22-25 from 9 p.m. to 5 a.m. Berkeley Bridge, I-264: Single-lane closure westbound on March 25 from 7 p.m. to midnight. James River Bridge, Route 17: Alternating, mobile, singe-lane closures in both directions on March 22 from 9 a.m. to 3 p.m. Alternating, mobile, singe-lane closures southbound March 23 from 9 a.m. to 3 p.m.
    [Show full text]
  • The Upper James River
    Waterproof The Upper James River The James River originates at the only class I or II rapids making it ideal will need to plan a river trip. This guide A Paddle Guide to the Upper confluence of the Jackson and Cowpasture for canoe or kayak trips at normal water includes locations of boat landings, rivers in Botetourt County and forms levels. The white water section below campsites, major rapids, and unique Virginia’s longest and most famous river. Glasgow includes a class III section for historic points of interests along the way. The upper section of the James River those interested in more technical water. This is a great resource for planning day is very scenic with stunning Blue Ridge trips as well as multi-day canoe camping mountain views. Dam releases on the This paddle guide covers the upper 64 expeditions. Jackson River flow releases ensure the miles section from the start of the James upper James River is typically run able river to the Cushaw Dam, just below all season. The first 60 miles contain Snowden. It includes everything a paddler Using This Map George Washington and Rapids (See River Safety panel for class system) Jefferson National Forrest* 30 Mile markers— numbered from start of the James Park* River counting down stream Landmark These maps have been orientated so that the river always flows from the bottom of the map to the top of the map. This allows paddlers to easily orient themselves in the river in terms of river right and left while paddling downstream. Bridge 1km Distance gauge 0 1mi North indicator Canal Boat launch Small boat launch Commercial campground River flow River Informal camping Appalachian Trail Hiking Trail *All land along river bank is private property unless noted otherwise.
    [Show full text]
  • HAMPTON ROADS CLOSURES on WATER CROSSINGS, INTERSTATES and OTHER NOTABLE DETOURS for the Week of Jan
    RELEASE: IMMEDIATE Dec. 31, 2020 CONTACT: Media Line: 757-956-3032 [email protected] HAMPTON ROADS CLOSURES ON WATER CROSSINGS, INTERSTATES AND OTHER NOTABLE DETOURS For the week of Jan. 3-9 NOTE: This list covers full closures of interstates, ramps, bridges and primary roads, and lane closures at the bridge-tunnels and the Berkley, Coleman, High Rise and James River bridges. *Scheduled closures are subject to change based on weather conditions and other factors.* ​For information on the many other lane closures necessary for maintenance and construction throughout Hampton Roads, visit 511Virginia.org, download the 511VA smartphone app, or dial 511. Bridges & Tunnels: Monitor-Merrimac Memorial Bridge-Tunnel, I-664: Single-lane closures northbound on Jan. 4-5 as early as 8 p.m. to 5 a.m. Single-lane closures southbound on Jan. 4-7 as early as 8 p.m. to 5 a.m. Alternating, mobile, single-lane closures northbound on Jan. 6 from 9 p.m. to 5 a.m. James River Bridge, Route 17: Single-lane closures in both directions on Jan. 4 from noon to 3 p.m. and on Jan. 5-8 from 9 a.m. to 3 p.m. HRBT Expansion Project: For lane closures and project updates related to the HRBT Expansion Project, visit HRBTExpansion.org. ​Elizabeth River Tunnels (Downtown/Midtown Tunnels): Go to Elizabeth River Tunnels for maintenance schedules on the Downtown Tunnel (I-264), Midtown Tunnel (U.S. 58) and MLK Expressway (Route 164).​ I-64 Widening Segment III Project, York County: Lane closures under flagger control on Lakeshead Drive at the I-64 overpasses on Jan.
    [Show full text]
  • Chesapeake Bay Impact Crater, South of James River
    The Effects of the Chesapeake Bay Impact Crater on the Geologic Framework and the Correlation of Hydrogeologic Units of Southeastern Virginia, South of the James River Professional Paper 1622 Chesapeake Bay York River Cape Charles Atlantic J a m Ocean e s R iv e r Norfolk Virginia Norfolk Beach U.S. Department of the Interior U.S. Geological Survey Availability of Publications of the U.S. Geological Survey Order U.S. Geological Survey (USGS) publications by calling Documents. Check or money order must be payable to the the toll-free telephone number 1-888-ASK-USGS or contact- Superintendent of Documents. Order by mail from— ing the offices listed below. Detailed ordering instructions, along with prices of the last offerings, are given in the cur- Superintendent of Documents rent-year issues of the catalog “New Publications of the U.S. Government Printing Office Geological Survey.” Washington, DC 20402 Books, Maps, and Other Publications Information Periodicals By Mail Many Information Periodicals products are available through the systems or formats listed below: Books, maps, and other publications are available by mail from— Printed Products USGS Information Services Printed copies of the Minerals Yearbook and the Mineral Com- Box 25286, Federal Center modity Summaries can be ordered from the Superintendent of Denver, CO 80225 Documents, Government Printing Office (address above). Publications include Professional Papers, Bulletins, Water- Printed copies of Metal Industry Indicators and Mineral Indus- Supply Papers, Techniques of Water-Resources Investigations, try Surveys can be ordered from the Center for Disease Control Circulars, Fact Sheets, publications of general interest, single and Prevention, National Institute for Occupational Safety and copies of permanent USGS catalogs, and topographic and Health, Pittsburgh Research Center, P.O.
    [Show full text]
  • Nelson County Comprehensive Plan
    Nelson County Comprehensive Plan As Approved by the Nelson County Board of Supervisors and Nelson County Planning Commission Adopted _______, 2012 Prepared by The Nelson County Planning Commission with the assistance of The Citizens of Nelson County at the request of The Nelson County Board of Supervisors Staff support from the Thomas Jefferson Planning District Commission Design Resources Center, University of Virginia Nelson County Department of Planning Nelson County Comprehensive Plan Table of Contents Executive Summary i Chapter One-Portrait of Nelson County 1 A Brief History of Nelson County 1 Nelson County Today 2 Chapter Two-Purpose of the Plan 4 Chapter Three-Goals and Principles 5 Economic Development 5 Transportation 7 Education 8 Public and Human Services 9 Natural, Scenic, and Historic Resources 10 Recreation 11 Development Areas 13 Rural Conservation 14 Chapter Four-Land Use Plan 16 Introduction 16 Land Use Planning Data 17 Existing Land Use 17 Areas Served by Water and/or Sewer 19 Environmental Constraints: Steep Slopes, Soil Potential for Agricultural Use 21 Land Use Plan for Designated Development Areas 25 Rural Small Town Development Model 26 Rural Village Development Model 28 Neighborhood Mixed Use Development Model 30 Mixed Commercial Development Model 32 Light Industrial Development Model 34 Land Use Plan for Rural Conservation Areas 36 Future Land Use Plan and Map 38 Chapter Five – Transportation Plan 41 Introduction 41 Purpose 41 Background 42 Existing Plans and Studies 42 Existing Roadway Inventory 48 Interstate
    [Show full text]
  • 130954 Opinion by Justice Leroy F
    Present: Kinser, C.J., Millette, Mims, McClanahan, and Powell, JJ., and Russell and Koontz, S.JJ. ELIZABETH RIVER CROSSINGS OPCO, LLC v. Record No. 130954 OPINION BY JUSTICE LEROY F. MILLETTE, JR. DANNY MEEKS, ET AL. October 31, 2013 VIRGINIA DEPARTMENT OF TRANSPORTATION v. Record No. 130955 DANNY MEEKS, ET AL. FROM THE CIRCUIT COURT OF THE CITY OF PORTSMOUTH James A. Cales, Jr., Judge Designate In this appeal we hold that the General Assembly did not unconstitutionally delegate its power of taxation to the Virginia Department of Transportation ("VDOT") and Elizabeth River Crossings OpCo, LLC ("ERC") under the terms of the Public-Private Transportation Act of 1995, Code § 56-556 et seq. ("PPTA"), and that the Comprehensive Agreement between VDOT and ERC does not abridge the Commonwealth's police power. I. Facts and Proceedings A. History of Tunnels Crossing the Elizabeth River A branch of the Elizabeth River separates the City of Portsmouth from the City of Norfolk. The first tunnel crossing the Elizabeth River between Portsmouth and Norfolk was the two- lane Downtown Tunnel, which opened in 1952. The Downtown Tunnel experienced "steadily increasing traffic . at levels substantially higher than those originally projected." In response, the General Assembly authorized the construction of an additional crossing in 1956. The Midtown Tunnel was subsequently built a short distance northwest of the Downtown Tunnel and was opened in 1962. By 1973, the General Assembly was made aware that traffic through the Downtown Tunnel had reached capacity, with substantial congestion being commonplace and likely to get worse. Further, the Midtown Tunnel was projected to reach capacity within a few years.
    [Show full text]
  • Economic Effects of Newly Imposed Tolls on Heavily Traveled Tunnel
    Journal of Regional Analysis & Policy 49(1): 78{91 A Tale of Two Tunnels: Economic Effects of Newly Imposed Tolls on Heavily Traveled Tunnel Venues in Virginia James V. Koch Old Dominion University Ziniya Zahedi Old Dominion University Received: 11/15/2018 Accepted: 01/22/2019 Abstract Many studies have examined the reaction of drivers either to the opening of new roads, bridges and tunnels that assess tolls upon those who use them, or to driver reactions when existing tolls are increased. This study examines a much less common situation|the imposition of tolls on two existing, heavily traveled tunnel venues. Ordinarily, driver demand is price inelastic in tolled situations, but not so here. Initial driver reactions to the new tolls were strongly negative, though this response did dissipate somewhat over time. Critical issues here include the availability of viable substitute free travel venues; the amount of time lost by drivers when the substitutes are used; and, the disparate impact of the new tolls upon the cities adjacent to the tolled tunnels. These results may discipline policy-makers and investors who regard tolls as enticing solutions to their problems. 1 Introduction Once tolls have been established on roads, bridges and tunnels, increases in those tolls are a regular occur- rence. What happens, however, when a government decides to place tolls on vehicles that traverse heavily used, but previously free highway venues? This is an unusual circumstance in the United States. The tolling situation examined in this paper focuses on the Commonwealth of Virginia, which via a 58-year public-private partnership with the Elizabeth River Company, expanded and improved two existing tunnels that carry traffic between the cities of Norfolk and Portsmouth in the 1.75 million-person Hampton Roads1 area in Southeast Virginia.
    [Show full text]
  • South Norfolk Jordan Bridge (“SNJB”) Is a 5,372 Ft Fixed Bridge That Connects the City of Chesapeake to the City of Portsmouth Over the Elizabeth River In
    TOLL REVENUE NEW BUILD / REPLACEMENT SOUTH NORFOLK PRIVATIZATION PRIVATE FINANCING UNSOLICITED BID JORDAN BRIDGE CHESAPEAKE, VA The South Norfolk Jordan Bridge (“SNJB”) is a 5,372 ft fixed bridge that connects the City of Chesapeake to the City of Portsmouth over the Elizabeth River in Virginia. The City of Chesapeake had decommissioned the original Jordan Bridge in November 2008. An unsolicited proposal submitted by United Bridge Partners (“UBP”) to replace the Jordan Bridge with a new, privately owned bridge was approved by the City of Chesapeake in January 20091 by executing an Acquisition and Development Agreement (“ADA”) between UBP and the City of Chesapeake. As part of the ADA, UBP assumed responsibility to demolish the existing Jordan Bridge, aquired the right of way and easments associated with the bridge, and the right to toll, design, construct, finance, operate and assume ownership of a new bridge and associated tolling facilities on the SNJB. The construction of the SNJB was reported to be privately financed. Project revenue on the SNJB comes from tolls, set by the private operator with no defined limit, which are collected electronically on the bridge2. Note: the facts of this case study were reviewed by UBP. We have provided Chesapeake footnotes to describe instances where UBP disputes information in the public domain. BACKGROUND + PROJECT DRIVERS The Elizabeth River Corridor between Midtown Tunnel and High Rise Bridge in southern eastern Virginia near the Chesapeake Bay serves approximately 250,000 Figure 1: Elizabeth River Crossings. vehicle trip crossings per weekday. It is a growing corridor that primarily serves Source: Pickard, A.
    [Show full text]
  • Powhatan Creek Blueway Brochure
    The Blueway, open 24 hours a day, is located off Jamestown Road. The recommended roundtrip is about Public Access Points Emergencies eight miles from Powhatan Creek Park to the Causeway and back. Only well-prepared and highly skilled paddlers should attempt the additional eight-mile trip Much land along this creek is privately owned; please do Dial 911 for all emergencies. around Jamestown Island. not use private land. Public access points are located at: Cell phones are the best means of communication. Please keep in mind that Powhatan Creek and the Powhatan Creek Park and Blueway The dispatcher can contact the appropriate agency • Powhatan Creek Park and Blueway, a Chesapeake Discovering the Past; James River can change from peaceful and calm to 1831 Jamestown Road for aid. Although cell phones have become a widely harsh and extremely rough in a matter of minutes. used tool, do not rely on them entirely; you may be Bay Gateway, is one of your entry points to enjoy and Williamsburg, VA 23185 learn about the places and stories of the Chesapeake and Protecting the Future Therefore, plan your trip carefully and keep an eye For park information, call 757-259-5360. out of transmission range, cell phone batteries have on the weather! a short life, and some equipment is affected by the its watershed. The 64,000 square mile Bay watershed A visit to the Powhatan Creek Park and Blueway marine environment. For these reasons, VHF FM radios is a complex ecosystem. Home to over 15 million offers an opportunity to connect with the rich history • James City County Marina are an alternative.
    [Show full text]
  • Downtown Tunnel/Midtown Tunnel/MLK Extension Project Presented To: HRTPO Board, January 19, 2012
    Downtown Tunnel/Midtown Tunnel/MLK Extension Project Presented to: HRTPO Board, January 19, 2012 Presented by: Frank Fabian, P.E., Senior Project Manager, Virginia Department of Transportation 1 PROJECT OVERVIEW 2 Project Overview New, parallel two-lane tunnel Brambleton Avenue Hampton Boulevard interchange Refurbishment and modifications safety improvements Extending MLK to I-264, High St interchange Refurbishment and safety improvements 3 The Midtown Team Owner – Virginia Department of Transportation (VDOT) Stakeholders – Federal Highway Administration (FHWA) Cities of Portsmouth and Norfolk Virginia Port Authority Businesses and Citizens of the Commonwealth Consultant – Southeastern Transportation Partners (STP) JV: Parsons Transportation Group (PTG) and Rummel, Klepper & Kahl (RK&K) Subs: Athavale Lystad & Assoc. Business Transf Group Capita Symonds Continental Field Services, GET Solutions GZA Geo Env HBA Arch Keville Ent Kimley-Horn MBP NXL Seventh Point 4 The Midtown Team Developer – Elizabeth River Crossings (ERC) • JV of Skanska ID and Macquarie Capital Design/Builder – a JV between: • Skanska SE (45%) • Kiewit (40%) • Weeks (15%) Design Team – Parsons Brinckerhoff (Tunnel) Volkert (MLK Civil/Structural) Schnabel (MLK Geotech) PMI (Survey) • Seven Subconsultants 5 Value Beyond Traffic Improvements Direct Promotes Local Job Economic Economic Creation Stimulus Development Over $1 billion in $170 to $254 million Over 500 construction works increase in regional construction jobs 1 Built by local productivity directly created companies
    [Show full text]
  • James River Water Project – Frequently Asked Questions 1. Why Are the Counties of Louisa and Fluvanna Planning to Withdraw
    James River Water Project – Frequently Asked Questions OCTOBER, 2019 Figure 1 - Project Route / Siting (blue line represents water line) 1. Why are the Counties of Louisa and Fluvanna planning to withdraw water from the James River? The 2002 statewide drought led then Governor Mark Warner to issue Executive Order 39 (the Virginia Water Supply Initiative), which mandated statewide long-range water supply planning to ensure growth projections could be met. Through the development of their long range (50 year) water supply plans (Louisa’s plan is online here; Fluvanna’s is here) and growth forecasts for the entirety of both localities, both counties identified a need for a sustainable water source. Existing groundwater and surface water sources in the area are insufficient (for example, Lake Anna cannot be used as a water supply due to its purpose to support the operations of the Dominion Energy Lake Anna Nuclear Power Plant). Without a sustainable water supply, existing residents could face increasing water use restrictions and new growth would eventually come to a stop. The James River Water project is intended to serve not only existing needs (such as the Zion Crossroads area of Louisa and Fluvanna), but current and future needs of both residential and commercial users throughout both counties. Page 1 James River Water Project – Frequently Asked Questions OCTOBER, 2019 2. Is there an urgent need to complete the James River Water Supply Project? Yes. Louisa and Fluvanna are growing. Homes, businesses, and industries need water. Current water capacities are unsustainable, and therefore the counties will not be able to sustain responsible, forecasted growth without the Project.
    [Show full text]